it is always entertaining with these guys. that does it for us. >> "media buzz" is coming up next. keep it right here on the fox newschannel. here is howard. on the buzz meter this sunday morning, a deadly mass shooting a mile and a half from here in washington sparks saturation coverage and some embarrassing media blunders. >> if there are two shoot you ers and if that proves to be correct it is the most significant fact. it is going to mean two people conspired to carry out the attack. >> now we can confirm from navy officials and a navy spokesman they are pursuing a second shooter. they believe there is a second shooter on the scene. >> the best way to say this is there is no hard evidence at this point there was more than one shooter involved here despite all we heard today and all of the confusing information. >> some news organizations saying there were multiple

shooters and others reporting the wrong man was the masked murderer. others are saying aaron alexis had an ar-15 assault rifle. haven't the journalists learned the lesson of past tragedies? and what was it like to be on the scene of this. greta joins us and has a message for media critics. >> i am sitting on the sidelines and talking about the media and move 15 blocks and come down and see the story. >> a catholic magazine talks in a remarkable interview with pope francis. and twitter explodes with racist messages after an asian american is crowned miss america. how did things get so nasty? and the president gets pummeled, especially by liberal columnists over the handling of syria, the shooting, the budget deadlock. have the mainstream media turned on barack obama? this is media buzz.

we want to hear from you. send me a tweet about the media's mistakes on the dc shooting story or whether you would wait hours for accurate information. we will read the best after the program. after the first shots were fired at the washington navy yard, it seems news organizations were trying to be cautious, but there is a danger of relying on unnamed law enforcement sources in a fast-moving situation. >> if there were as many as three shooters that would change this situation dramatically. >> right now nbc news has a report of just one shooter. there were earlier reports of multiple shooters. jay there has been a name -- >> there has been a name that has been reported, but we are told the name out there is incorrect. >> by the end of the rampage alexis had a shotgun, a handgun, an ar-15. there were initial reports that the shooter used an ar-15

and that apparently is not true. >> we are just speculating, but this is experience speculation. >> cbs' john miller reported the shooter was a man who wasn't at the navy yard. his id was found near the actual killer, aaron alexis. cbs tweeted, we are retracting our report that harvey chance was the navy yard shooter. nbc calling chance the shooter as well. they said we are now retracting that report and deleting those tweets. has the news business again fallen short in time of crisis? joining us now as she does every week lauren ashburn. juan williams and amy holmes who anchors real news at the "the blaze." they make these mistakes again and again. i don't understand the rush to report unconfirmed details. >> reporters want it first before they want it right in

many instances. the penalty for making a mistake is almost nonexistent in this day of social media and information we receive. there is no context. you want it out there quickly. it used to be that there were big libel suits anytime a big mistake was made. when was the last time you saw a really large libel suit over a media error? the punishment just isn't there. you take down the story or you update the story and that's it. >> i wonder whether this fellow, chance, will decide to hire a lawyer. he spoke to greta and let's see what he had to say about being named wrongly as a mass murderer. >> how do you feel about all of this? >> i feel upset. i feel that my privacy was violated. i felt like my whole world was turned up shied -- turned upside down and now i am left

with trying to put it back together. >> so there are consequences to these erroneous reports. >> absolutely. can you imagine the nightmare of being named as a mass shooter? they say where do you get your reputation back. the media did correct it almost meedly, within minutes or hours. and because of social media and because of stwitter and getting information out quickly it was quickly ect cred, but his name is still in the public dough dosh dosh domain. >> newtown there was a mistake. law enforcement is confused themselves and have piecemeal or inaccurate information. >> correct. i will say i differ with lauren about the consequences. i think john king at cnn, i think his career was hurt by the fact that he came out with misinformation during that boston episode. >> king was arrested and in

fact he was not. >> they didn't penalize him. >> i don't know exactly because i don't know the internals, but my impression was john wishes he had not made that error. >> of course, nobody wants to make that. >> in that boston situation, there were two young men who were named as suspects and pictures were on the front of the paper, and they had filed suit. they were charging they were defamed by the act. >> that was the new york post. >> but it is not the norm. >> is there too much focus in each of these terrible tragedies on the shooters, motivation, how he was growing up and not enough on the victims? >> i think a lot of us would agree that in boston that was definitely the case. you saw the shooter on the cover of "rolling stone" and a lot of people had to pull that off. in this instance, we didn't see continuation of coverage on the whole event and throughout the week. it ended on tuesday. there are stories that continued on

gun control and other issues, but maybe part of it is we figured out quickly who the shooter was in this case and that he had mental issues and he was hearing things from walls and microwaves and maybe we understood who he was, and we didn't want to report on anything else. >> i think there are larger issues here we have to deal with in terms of media. the proliferation of social media, twitter. you showed these people saying we are sending a twitter or deleting a twitter. what are you doing? what you are doing is responding to pressures to get it first and get out there. they have nothing to report. they know nothing. it is not just media. it is also law enforcement. you get people at the fringes of law enforcement and not in the direct line of command who want to appear to be more important. they are talking to reporters and feeding reporters information that is misinformation. >> the first day's coverage -- that is a good point.

the first day's coverage the reporters were expected to be serious and sober. by that night it turned quickly to gun control. we played some sound on the bill o'reilly show. >> i have to loaf it there. we have this debate every time. i want the day to come when we don't have to have this ridiculous debate time and again in america. ar-15 killing multiple americans. i just cannot have this debate anymore and it is ridiculous. do something about it. the three gentlemen who came on, think about your position. think about how it helped save americans lives because it doesn't. more guns is not the answer. >> some of the liberal press use the murders to advance their anti-gun agenda. awful. >> i certainly don't think it is fair to say that all of the mainstream media is con prized of second amendment fanatics. >> are you kidding me? >> are you kidding me?

>> the ar-15 story reported by everyone from the new york times to the l.a. times to all of the networks was wrong. so this is not a great case for gun control because there was no semiautomatic or assault rifle used. despite people like piers morgan and the new york daily news trying to make a gun control statement, a point i was trying to make is it is okay to debate these things. that's the media's job. >> right, but it is not the only story. there was another shooting in chicago this week that points to another source of gun violence and that is gang activity. you don't see the sim type of focus -- the same type of focus. mayor rahm emanuel would have to take responsibility for the social conditions for a great number of citizens in his city. the media moved off the gun control debate quickly because the media after newtown failed in the gun control agenda. >> you are adopting the notion that the media and the journalists have an agenda.

>> why is it considered having an agenda. lets leave the commentators aside and piers morgan aside. you say this is an important issue in america. there are reasonable endorsements like republican senator pat toomey and background checks at gun shows. let's have a full debate. why that as opposed to dealing with a new issue? >> joe biden said part of the approach is to look at mental illness. where did that go? >> amy says the media has an agenda on gun control and i say some commentators do. what they are trying to do is have a debate and it is a critical debate. >> i don't know how you get away from it. this story does breech some of those issues. what we learned is this man had psychiatric issues. people were aware of it. nonetheless he was able to go

out and buy a gun. when you talk about reasonable steps that were endorsed by toomey and others and the american people, they talk about requiring background checks for on-line purchases of guns, requiring that people who -- >> but what about the story about mental illness? was he getting proper troament? treatment? how could he fall through the cracks as looney bird. let me say, if you want to have an i'd logical argument and not what how we was talking about -- >> how about gang violence in chicago? >> i am on your side. we should cuff that in terms of -- we should cover it because it is more common. i saw a poll saying people say after newtown let's have more gun control and now they say nra and gun -- people opposed to guns they never lose on capitol hill. they have capitol hill locked down. >> i am unarmed, but i have to separate you two because i want to turn to one more question.

the day after this happened on monday, i thought like after boston and like after newtown i thought there would be saturation of coverage and after a day or two the media was turning away. >> the next morning gma had an interview with britney spears. not only did we move obut we moved on in 12 hours. >> what explains that? >> add. reporters have a.d.d. we left to go to the navy yard coverage and then we fled that to go to the obama showdown coverage. it is hard on reporters and hard in the limited amount of time you are given on cable news to keep addressing deeper issues. >> isn't it also because they know there is no traction on capitol hill. there is no follow-up on that angle and it was not a conspiracy. it was clearly a man with mental health issues. >> one in four people in this country are diagnosed with mental health disorders every year.

>> maybe i feel this because it felt like it was in this neighborhood and maybe it was on a military base and they said it could have been me in a movie theater. a shooter shows up. i have to suspect there is also a certain numbness in the media and in the country. >> that is the heart and soul of it. it is a depressing story and so much of what we do in the media is info-tainment. you can play at the heart strings and i don't think the media felt it and the people didn't and it is a shame. >> there is one silver lining in terms of our security and protection. a lot of these shooters are inspoired by media coverage. >> they didn't want the coverage too. they wanted to move away because they don't want this conversation. >> you will have to continue this outside. i have to move to the next segment. the relationship between the president and the press has turned downright chilly.

is the romance really over?

just listen to what some columnists are saying about president obama these days on his handling of syria for instance. one of the more stunning and despicable displays of presidential confidence i have ever witnessed. and obama is being talked about on style points. if this is what he really believes this is scary. the first one, liberal time columnist joe klein and the next ruth marcus. is msn turning on president obama? >> i would say it five years too late. >> i told you so mode. >> too bad we didn't have the scrutiny when he was a candidate. i think the honeymoon is over. it might have been kicked off by matt damon when he was on b.e.t. and he said the

president had broken up with him on the nsa scandal. it capped it off with syria and the myth handling bumbling about that. >> washington is about kicking palm when they are down. there is a reason president obama got a second dog. he needed another friend. me -- he is perceived to be weak he is down in the polls and people are going to go after you. i think that's part of it. there is a piling on ethic. she uh ported him and said the man who connected so electrically in 2008 is causing americans to over look his thin resume. you never would have heard anything like that. >> we certainly didn't. >> i think you did. joe klein, maureen -- your side is was tau gating him and ripping his staff as second rate and saying he is not a leader. this is qoo it a turn -- this is quite a turn around.

>> it is. first of all, we heard the criticisms of president obama. there are people out there not just thin resume, they say he is a mystery. where did this guy come from? how can he exist? whoa hear criticism from the right. there is no shortage on is that. it is striking to me and a lot of these people think they are gaining credibility by jumping in at this point when he made some crazy moves that people don't understand. what he was doing on the syria things, turns out so far he has escaped unharmed and the country is better for it because we didn't have to go to war. >> bill clinton told cnn the republicans have a much maury liable media base than the democrats. is that fair? >> that's true. >> we have a reliable media base? which media is he talking about? >> oh come on. amy, wake up. >> conservatives are piled on continuously by the media. the media loves nothing more than when republicans are turning on one another. >> don't you work for "the

blaze"? >> don't you know about grudge report and red state and fox news? >> are you saying that we have the same amount of powers than the new york times or "washington post"? >> imagine, the "wall street journal" is the number one newspaper and the most conservative editorial page in the nation. >> but not conservative -- but conservative on the reporting side. >> thank god. >> what is interesting is traditionally second terms for presidents tend to focus on foreign policy and president obama's lack of experience on that stage is really under cutting him. >> i have half a minute. if there is piling on, is it temporary or is this it for the second term? >> he is a lame duck. >> all right? the election was not even a year ago. >> i know. people say we want to fight. the people, the media, everyone wants the next fight, the next race. so it is time to just move on from him. >> again, i agree with lauren. we seem to --

>> imagine that. >> but it seems irresponsible in terms of the country that needs a leader for the next three years. to say he is a lame duck -- he was a lame duck the day he was elected. >> what you are seeing right now is he made some mistakes and he is being caricatured and it is the lighting and the idea that you have liberals now who say x x -- you know, are you not as faithful as we thought. >> thanks for a spirited discussion. lauren, see you later. up next, greta van success -- greta has more including on the navy yard shooting. that's next.

jennifer, the thing that seizes my attention and

reminded how real this game is, seven families have been notified tonight and they are looking to notify the other five. these families are at home waiting and wondering. to me that is the most painful part. >> race together scene of a crime is the oldest form. greta was on the record and was among those who showed up at the washington navy yard soon after the masacre. i sat down with her in studio 1. >> greta, how do you gather information when you have to race to the scene of a mass shooting and there is chaos everywhere and it is blocked off? >> pound the pavement, the old-fashioned way. i spent 14 hours in the street and all i did was walk around and talk to police and people come out of buildings and i go out and say 3orry to bother you, were you inside? did you see something or hear something? you madly try to gather information the old-fashioned way, the gum shoe investigative ways. we have iphones and we listen to what is going on on the

network. we get wires and people send us stuff. it is nonstop information. the best thing is to hit the pavement and ask questions. >> the gadgets are great, but no substitute to hitting the pavement. what is it like emotionally to show up to a place where so many were sen leslie killed? -- senselessly killed? >> horrible. but i did is it a longtime ago, virginia tech, colorado and columbine. it is horrible. these people are suffering. on monday people were coming out of buildings who were not even 197, but were shellshocked because they were by security for a number of reasons so they could clear the area. reporters as much as we are hated we do are human and we have empathy. >> some people doubt that. because you had been to so many of the tragedies i sensed a a certain weariness in your reporting that here we go

again, here i go again having to cover something where so many people have been killed by a crazy gunman? >> i hope people do note the weariness. i am sick and tired of the violence people commit on one another. if i am not weary there is something wrong with me. we have to have more of a public discussion about how bad it is. we need to be -- we have become de desensitized to violence. i can walk out of a movie and somebody says was that violent -- uh, oh yeah it was violent. years ago i would walk out talking about the fact it was violent. we have become so desensitized to these events. we have to get back to seeing them as something that is profoundly having an impact on people's lives. >> first of all, you don't try to keep your feelings out of it and be a kind of robo anchor? >> i can. i did reports during the day and when i did that i told what i saw and everything else. when it came to 10:00 and the audience appetite is a little

more, the audience has been watching it throughout the day because our audience here at fox is like family. they watch all day long and we know them. by the time 10:00 rolled around and they had enough of the fox facts, i then gave them a little more of the personal stuff. that is deliberate. our fans and our viewers are really smart. they know what i am talking about the facts. they know when i am talking about my opinion. they know when i am feeling something has happened. our viewers are really smart, but most importantly they really know us. >> you talk about being desensitized. i wonder whether all of the media is desensitized. there are just so many going back to columbine and aurora and fort hood and newtown. everyone knows the drill. we show up and cover the victim families. then quickly we move on. >> well, we didn't really quote, move on. just on monday alone i spent 14 hours on the street. >> i am talking about by later

in the week it seemed like another story competing with other stories. where in earlier tragedies we dominated the news, the boston bombing for weeks. i grapple with this -- maybe because it happened here, but i grapple with it and i don't want it to become routine. >> there is a judgment call and a balance. what happened to these families is terrible. we spend a lot of time on this network and even no commercial breaks and i suspect other networks did it as well. there are other issues that affect the american people whether it is the continuing resolution and the debt ceiling and syria and the gassing, it is a judgment call. the fact we move to another topic doesn't mean we don't give a damn or it is unimportant. it is our effort in a limited amount of time which is what happens in a news organization. it is a limited amount of time. we are trying to get everybody the news and it does not for one second mean that we don't think what happened on monday was profoundly horrible and tragic. >> "washington post" article says the rest of the country

isn't that focused on what happened in the washington navy yard because there were no children involved or anything particularly unusual about it. the victims were anonymous government workers. >> i thought he was taking the media to task on that. here is what i thought. i was down there monday for 14 hours and i never saw him. he is a "washington post" reporter. why didn't he come down if he thought it was so important and come down and see what is going on? instead he is sitting on the sidelines and writing about everybody else. up assisted of sitting on the sidelines -- instead of sitting on the sidelines and talk about the media, move 15 blocks and actually come down and see the story. we in the media sit on the sidelines because we are not going through it like the families. we are on the sidelines. a reporter like that who is 15 blocks away, he is sitting on the sidelines of the sidelines taking a slap at us while we are sitting on the street. i saw every news organization out there trying to do their best. i saw our competitors at cnn and msnbc. everybody was trying to do it.

this guy sitting in his office at his computer terminal, wow he has great thoughts about it. i thought you know what, pal, come on down. if you want to cover the story and know what it is like to talk about the american people and talk about the media coverage, for god sakes take a cab and come see us. >> that "washington post" reporter was not so much criticizing the media coverage in my view, but questioning why the media and society as a whole so quickly moved on from this tragedy at the navy yard. send us a tweet about our show. we will read the best messages at the end of the program. and then ahead on "media buzz" the times new editor cracks the glass ceiling and the unusual circumstances of the fox news interview with bashar assad.

hag

c

live from america's knew headquarters, i am arthel-nevil.

a tense standoff in kenya continues into the second day. reports of new gunfire as government forces attempt to rescue the dozens of hostages still inside. 59 people were killed and 175 wounded including at least four americans when a group of islamic extremists stormed the shopping center yesterday. somalia's al-shabab organization is claiming responsibility. and in pakistan another terror attack killing 60 people. taliban suicide bombers setting off their devices at a church as christians there left their sunday services. 120 more people were wounded. the group says the attack was in retaliation of u.s. drone strikes in pakistan's remote tribal region. see balk at the top of the hour. back to "media buzz." fox scored a coup by landing an interview with

bashar assad set up biden nighs could you sin niche. by dennis kussinich. i was skeptical because there was no stance on where kussinich stands. >> let me take my hat of on. i am about american interests and what is in america's interest? it wasn't in america's interest to attack syria. >> but fox rightly insisted that he be accompanied by a journalist. the net wok said in a statement that kussinich was not there representing fox, but he sure looked that way as he asked assad numerous questions. but the aggressive questioning balances kussinich's softer questions. especially as assad denied war casualties and his use of chemical weapons. it was refreshing that fox aired the unedited interview so people could make up their own minds. and in the print world,

"time" magazine named its first female editor in history. she has written more cover stories than anyone who has ever worked there. she said her daughters are proud of her, but she hopes women as topped fors soon won't be news at all. top editors soon won't be news at all. after the break, a lengthy and unprecedented interview with pope francis has the media, well, buzzing. we will get the back story from the editor who made it happen.

pope francis had comments that the church shouldn't be narrowly focused on gays, abortion and girt -- and birth control. the 12,000-word article began as a proposal from america, the national catholic review and the editor-in-chief joins me from dayton. we have a bit of a satellite delay. matt malone, welcome. you are sitting in the office with a colleague after pope francis' election and you say what to him? >> i said how should we cover this pay paw see? he said we should try to interview the pope. it was as simple as that. it was unlikely and unprecedented. but we had just lived through six weeks of unprecedented and unlikely events with the resignation of pope benedict

and the first jesuit as pope. >> how in heaven's name did you pull this off? >> well, i think -- it is a minor miracle i think. we reached out to our colleagues in washington and our jesuit colleagues in rome. they all said you need to talk to father -- the papal spoix person -- pokes spur. he said, you know, the pope doesn't do interviews, but he might do something if you came as a coalition of groups. at about that time we learned that our jesuit colleagues in rome were also interested in doing an interview. we teamed up with them and we put the questions together. we went to the pope and the pope said yes, i will sit down and answer these. we sent the editor over to do the interview and he transcribed it it and we translated it into english.

it was that simple. >> i guess all politics is local. let me ask this question, as you disclose in reporting this remarkable interview, the article itself had to be approved in advance by the vatican. no american news organization would do that for a politician , even up to and including the president. was there anything about that process that troubled you? >> well, no. a, because we towelly have a dog in this fight as catholic journalists and as a journal that is run by the society of jesus. we have a declared interest in the story. we consider ourselves a part of the church. but also we -- actually the text was not approved by the vatican. it was approved by the pope himself. we transcribed it, brought it back to him and he read it in italian with the journalist and said, yes, that's what i said.

go ahead. i thought of it more as confirming with the interviewee that we had accurately recorded what he had said rather than seeking his approval. you can see the distinction. >> there were so many revealing things in this lengthy interview. obviously one of the points that made worldwide headlines was when pope francis said -- when asked about homosexuality, tell me when god looks at the gay person does he endorse the existence of this person or reject and condemn this person? we must always consider the person. why did that in your view strike such a cord? >> well, because it is a real shift in emphasis. the church in the modern era has taught gay and lesbian people ought to be respected and their dignity ought to be cherished and welcomed in the church. what pope francis said thalz ns not only an aspect of the church's teaching, it is the

most important aspect of the church's teaching. while that does not reflect a change in doctrine or the church's official position on things, i wouldn't underestimate the power of that shift in tone and shift in emphasis. it is precisely that shift from thinking of these persons as ideas and social constructs to thinking of them as living, human beings who are our brothers and sisters and so forth. 2003 -- that we are all under going. the church in that sense, certainly in the person of pope francis is in touch with the times. >> i was really struck, father malone, where the former cardinal used to talk about how he was more authoritarian and he is a siner like everyone else, and the church has to move beyond small minded rules. this is a man who gave a news conference on an airplane with a bunch of reporters. is this a new papal communication?

>> it absolutely is. it is a new genre in papal communication. other popes have given interviews before, but they were heavily redacted and they have been didactic and internal. in this interview the pope is speaking more as a brother. he is speaking in a more intimate way. it is not philosophical and it is not theological. he is speaking from the heart. stwen -- between this interview and the interview on the plane we are seeing the birth of a new genre of paypal communication. it is one that is better suited i think to the temper of the times. particularly in an age that values authenticity. >> speaking of that, i have half a minute here and pope francis even has a twitter account. how much does all of this surprise you having covered previous popes who obviously engage in more traditional communication? >> it surprised me. i can tell you that i have never sat back and gasped

while reading a papal document and nor have i laughed and i did both of those things. >> if you gasped that says it all about this interview which is just -- it continues to resonate around the world and congratulations on the way you were able to do this. i think it was very revealing for your readers and we appreciate you coming on and talking to us about it. >> thank you, sir. joy thank you. and in our digital download, twitter can also be an ugly place even when it comes to a feel good story like miss america. that's up next.

time for our digital download. twitter is a rich and vibrant place, but it could be a

neighborhood polluted by the ugliness of racism. >> it happened on two very different stories this week. the first being the mass shooting at the washington navy yard. the tweets were so ugly that we have decided not to put them up. >> we are talking about messages and i have no sympathy for this shooter whatsoever, but messages that use the n-word and other racial slurs. why take this tragedy and exacerbate it by rubbing it at the raw wound of risism. >> some of these were viewed thousands of times. but the question is how prevalent are those tweets? there were other good things people were talking about. it was also used for good things. someone was tweeting information from inside the navy yard. so i think we tend to when there is something really negative, we tend to glum on to that. >> i am hoping very much so that this was a bigoted

fringe. you say maybe we use the media megaphone and give it wider recognition than it deserves? >> there was something to aggregating those tweets and seeing them in one place. i really do feel like there were other things that twitter was used for that is positive. and i am not usually twitter's defender, you know that. >> even a feel good story like miss america got polluted by this sort of thing. >> we have tweets on that. do you want to see them? >> let's just tell our viewers that she is an asian-american and was born in new york and grew up in this country. tell us about them. >> one woman said, "this is miss america and not miss foreign country." the second one from ejr buckeye. well, they just picked a muslim for miss america. that must have made obama happy. maybe he had a vote. and the last one from at shan wow. miss america right now

or miss al-qaeda? my problem with these tweets is that it is notable for the amount and the frequency and the specificity of these. it is just ugly. there is no other way to say it. >> fortunately miss america took this in stride. let's take a look at what she had to say after the pageant. >> i have always viewed myself as first and fore most american. i was born in syracuse and there are people who have to say things, but you have to rise above that. >> one of the things i wanted to look at was twitter's policy as it concerns tweets like this. so i went to the website and there is a website on twitter rules. here is the thing they don't allow, no impersonation, no trade trademark and no sharing of information, credit cards and social security numbers. they do not patrol for content. >> there is no way if twitter

wanted to it could patrol 400 million tweets a day. but it can kick people off and suspend their accounts. the problem is where do you draw the line? this stuff is ugly. but what about bad language and things that people find offensive that others don't. >> there is another one during the boston bombing that was offensive and naming possible shooters. it happened again this time. the gm of "red it" --" read it" he said this time it thr were only six posts, five comments and they pulled it within an hour. as things like thbs happen, we are becoming a better able to react. >> it is good we call out the people who do this. some of whom even use their own names. there was one example and the official was the sacramento democratic party actually posted hateful tweets about amanda carpenter who works for

senator ted cruise. he said he hoped her children would die. it was so ugly and just an explosion on-line. that guy has now been kicked out by the democratic party. >> there was another article about who -- there was a party at their summer house with all of these kids and the parents were upset because the guy whose house was trashed he posted the kids' pictures on-line. it is an unknown world. >> i love twitter, but you have to be careful about some of this stuff. thanks, still to come, the fox news anchor who is sharing his personal ordeal with the entire world.

there are a few of your tweets we received this hour. this is about the dc navy base shooting, naming suspects should absolutely wait to be confirmed. bobbie marlow confirmed too much anxiety if loved ones are

involved. it takes too much time to get through the conflicting reports. help us. and the story the change the media report as fact immediately. people in television have to decide how much they want to share of their private lives. brett beir has been open about the surgery on his 6-year-old heart defects. he tweeted when he went into anesthesia and sucialg re-- surgery and afterwards that the surgeon was pleased and father and son watching teenage mutant ninja turtles together. this is brett reporting on his personal stories. our thoughts and prayers with him and his family. that's it for this edition of "media buzz." let's continue the conversation on-line, on

twitter at media buzz fnc and our home page. we are back here next sunday morning at 11:00 eastern. join us for the latest buzz. a fox news alert. there are reports of new gunfire at the mall under siege in kenya as the violent standoff with islamist terrorists holding hostages goes into a second day. reports kenyan security forces were going to storm the building . some four americans are believed to be among the wounded in the attack on an upscale mall in kenya. as the death toll rises to almost 60, the west gate mall is in the heart of high row be and and -- nairobi and militants launched the attack with assault rifles. the group al shabaab making it clear they were targetin